Effects of Epstein‐Barr virus viral load and different treatment modality for stage III nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Background We investigated treatment results, the effects of different treatment modality, and pretreatment Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) viral load for stage III nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients. Methods The initial definitive treatment for 356 stage III NPC patients consisted of concurrent chemo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inHead & neck Vol. 42; no. 8; pp. 1765 - 1774
Main Authors Twu, Chih‐Wen, Wang, Wen‐Yi, Tsou, Hsiao‐Hui, Liu, Yi‐Chun, Jiang, Rong‐San, Liang, Kai‐Li, Lin, Po‐Ju, Lin, Tian‐Yun, Chen, Hsin‐Hong, Lin, Jin‐Ching
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.08.2020
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background We investigated treatment results, the effects of different treatment modality, and pretreatment Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) viral load for stage III nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients. Methods The initial definitive treatment for 356 stage III NPC patients consisted of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) or induction chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (IndCT‐RT). The pretreatment EBV DNA level separated patients into a high (n = 106) or low (n = 250) viral load (≥ or < 1000 copies/mL) subgroup. Outcome measures include relapse rates and various survivals. Results The 5‐year rates of overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival (PFS), distant metastasis failure‐free survival (DMFFS), and locoregional failure‐free survival (LRFFS) were 88.6%, 83.0%, 90.5%, and 90.5%, respectively. Patient characteristics and pretreatment viral load between IndCT‐RT and CCRT were no significant differences except for a higher percentage of N2 disease in the IndCT‐RT subgroup. Both treatment modality resulted in similar relapse rates (P = .56), OS (P = .20), PFS (P = .53), DMFFS (P = .89), and LRFFS (P = .35). However, patients with a high viral load experienced a higher relapse rate (33.0% vs 12.4%, P < .001) and worse OS (5‐year rate, 79.0% vs 92.8%, P < .001), PFS (73.7% vs 88.4%, P < .001), DMFFS (80.2% vs 95.0%, P < .001), and LRFFS (85.6% vs 92.6%, P = .005) than those with a low viral load. Conclusion Long‐term treatment results for stage III NPC patients are rather good. IndCT‐RT can achieve the same treatment outcome as CCRT. Risk grouping by pretreatment viral load identified a subgroup (30%) of patients associated with a significantly higher relapse rates and worse survivals. These high‐risk patients need to strengthen treatment intensity in future trials.
Bibliography:Funding information
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, Grant/Award Number: MOST 103‐2314‐B‐075A‐005‐MY3 106‐2314‐B‐075A‐011‐MY3; Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Grant/Award Numbers: TCVGH‐1027102C, 1037103C, 1047106C
ISSN:1043-3074
1097-0347
DOI:10.1002/hed.26096